This essay presents a portfolio of my three projects, which addresses them in relation to subject matter knowledge, writing process knowledge, rhetorical knowledge, genre knowledge, discourse community knowledge, and meta-cognition. Ultimately, the essay will draw a detailed conclusion on semester growth and impact on other discourse communities as an author and as a responder. In writing the project, the summary of Gordon Adams essay, I sought to address a specific audience, which includes students from Arizona State University, the management of Arizona State University, career experts, academic professionals, and future law students. Ideally, the purpose of this project was to present the views and academic journey of the future law student as well as my opinion on his views. Furthermore, the constraints related to this project relate to lack of reference literature, a possibility of biased information, cultural influence, and use of second person narration. The stance of this project depicts the mental or emotional position adopted with respect to Gordon Adams’ letter. The stance is that of hostility against the University’s Mathematics Requirement Arizona and that Arizona State University should grant Adams his request because he would not require algebra knowledge in his legal profession. The ethos of this project relates to the fact that Gordon Adams was an adult, a Justice Studies student of the university student, and a member of the Pawnee Tribe of Oklahoma who seeks to become a lawyer and representative of his tribe. The pathos of the project relates to the fact that he was the first person in his tribe to enter college, had a good academic record, and focused on his career path. The logos of the project relate to the idea that the legal profession does not require algebra knowledge. This project depicts metacognition where Adams uses higher thinking to realize that a waiver of the university’s mathematics requirements would help him realize his career objectives. Moreover, the genres used in this project include narrative writing, descriptive writing, and persuasive writing where I use logical appeals and emotions to win the audience’ support from my viewpoint. Notably, my project refers to the mathematics discourse community s seen in the specialized terminologies as algebra used in the project. In writing the project, I sought to address a specific audience, which includes kidney patients in America and their families, medical professionals, and my fellow students. Ideally, the purpose of this project was to present the views of the two authors, analyze their power of conviction, and present my opinion with regard to organ selling as a solution to kidney problems in America. The constraints in this project relate to the possibility of unsound and unhealthy decisions, lack of medical knowledge, and the presence of both positive and negative statements. The stance of this project depicts the legal, medical, and emotional position adopted with respect to organ selling. Joanna MacKay’s stance is in support of organ selling while David Holcberg’s stance is in support of human capacity to reason and make the right decisions. Most assuredly, my stance is that the legalization of organ selling can help many people but be building healthy lives would be more efficient in helping kidney patients.